Year 11 History: USA 1954-1975 Past Paper PDF

YEAR 11 HISTORY The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 1: The development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60 Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 Key Topic 3: US involvement in the Vietnam War, 1954-75 Key Topic 4: Reactions to, and end of, US involvemen...

YEAR 11 HISTORY The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 1: The development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60 Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 Key Topic 3: US involvement in the Vietnam War, 1954-75 Key Topic 4: Reactions to, and end of, US involvement in Vietnam, 1964-75 NAME: ___________________________ 2  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Contents Page Course Summary 1 Key Topic 1: Knowledge Organisers and Core Knowledge 3 Key Topic 2: Knowledge Organisers and Core Knowledge 7 Key Topic 3: Knowledge Organisers and Core Knowledge 16 Key Topic 4: Knowledge Organisers and Core Knowledge 19 Guidance on answering Paper 3 exam questions 24 Additional practice exam questions 26 Every week, you need to complete the following History homework: MUST Task 1: Carousel quizzes – find the link on Teams Task 2: Writing – write at least one paragraph answering the weekly question. SHOULD Write a full essay to answer the weekly question. COULD Test yourself using Carousel Study Packs on topics of your choice (see your History home page on Teams for links). 3  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 1: The development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60. Timeline The first enslaved Africans were transported to the British colony of Virginia 1619 (modern day USA). The American Revolution led to the Thirteen Colonies declaring 1775-83 independence from Britain and becoming a new country, the United States of America. The American Civil War was fought between the North (where slavery was 1861-65 banned) and the South (where slavery was widespread). The North won, leading to the abolition of slavery in the United States. Reconstruction – the US Army occupied the South to rebuild the region and guarantee the rights of recently-freed Black people. In response to white 1865-77 opposition, especially from the Ku Klux Klan, Reconstruction ended swiftly in 1877 and state governments in the South started passing ‘Jim Crow’ laws which discriminated against Black Americans. Plessy v. Ferguson was a legal case which said it was legal to segregate 1896 white and Black people, provided facilities were ‘separate but equal’. Brown vs Topeka (Kansas) – desegregates schools; ‘separate but equal’ is May 1954 not constitutional; major victory from the Supreme Court. Brown II added in 1955. White Citizens’ Councils begin being formed to oppose Brown and July 1954 desegregation. Emmett Till murdered. His mother publicly displays his body at the funeral in Aug 1955 Chicago. Dec 1955 – Montgomery Bus Boycott (Alabama) – first large, sustained, successful direct Nov 1956 action. Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) founded; led by Martin Jan 1957 Luther King. Little Rock High (Arkansas) – 9 black students escorted to school. Federal Sep 1957 Government now forced to intervene to support integration, due to negative media attention. Civil Rights Act – aimed to prevent discrimination, but ineffective due to Sep 1957 opposition. 4  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 1: The development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60. Key People Baptist minister who became the most prominent spokesperson and campaigner for the civil rights movement from 1955. Head of the Martin Luther King Jr. SCLC. Promoted non-violence and civil disobedience; campaigned (MLK) for voting rights, desegregation and in later years campaigned against poverty, capitalism, and the Vietnam War. NAACP activist whose refusal to stand up in 1955 led to the Rosa Parks Montgomery Bus Boycott. She later did further campaigns, including in support of Black Power. President 1953-1961 [Republican]. Tried to stay out of civil rights Dwight D. Eisenhower issues but forced to intervene at Little Rock in 1957. Governor of Arkansas. Ordered state troops to prevent black Orval Faubus students entering Little Rock in 1957, then closed all high schools in Little Rock to prevent integration. A map of key places in the the development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60 Brown vs. Topeka, Murder of 1954 Emmett Till, 1955 Little Rock Mississippi High, 1957 Montgomery Bus Boycott, 1955-56 Segregation in 1950 Key Places 1 Topka, Kansas 2 Little Rock, Arkansas 3 Montgomery (Alabama) 5  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 1: The development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60. 1.1 The position of black Americans in the early 1950s By law, Black Americans were equal to white Americans and had the same rights. However, racial discrimination was common in the 1950s. This meant that Black Americans had lower political, social and economic status, with the situation much worse in the South. Black Americans faced segregation and discrimination across the USA, especially in the Southern states where segregation was imposed by local ‘Jim Crow’ laws. Segregation was allowed because in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was legal if facilities were ‘separate but equal’. In reality, this was not the case. Voting rights - after the Civil War (1861-65), the Fifteenth Amendment had given Black Americans the right to vote, but many Southern states prevented Black Americans from registering to vote by introducing poll taxes and literacy tests. Nationwide civil rights organisations, such as the NAACP and CORE, worked to end segregation through legal challenges, protests and boycotts. Attempts at gaining civil rights were opposed, especially in the South. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) used violence to oppose the civil rights movement. KKK members saw themselves as superior to other races. Members of the KKK carried out lynching of Black Americans. The activities of the KKK were rarely punished as some of its members also worked in law enforcement. In 1955, Emmett Till, a 14-year old Black American boy from Chicago (in the North), visited relatives in Mississippi (in the South). He was accused of wolf-whistling at a white woman. A few days later, the husband and brother-in-law of the woman abducted Emmett Till and lynched (brutally killed) him. Emmet’s mother decided to display his body in an open-casket, to show people the reality of violence in the Jim Crow South and many Americans (Black and white) became more supportive of the civil rights movement. However, Emmett’s killers were found not-guilty by an all-white jury. 1.2 Progress in education In the Brown v. Topeka case, the Supreme Court ruled that schools should be desegregated but no timetable was set for desegregation. A second ruling said that schools should be desegregated ‘with all deliberate speed’ but nobody knew what this actually meant. White Americans in many Southern states, reacted badly to Brown v. Topeka. White Citizens Councils were groups of white people who worked to fight the Brown v. Topeka decision. They challenged desegregation in the courts, as well as using violence and influencing politicians to defend segregation – over 100 Southern senators and congressmen signed the Southern Manifesto opposing desegregation in education. Schools in some states desegregated with little trouble and by 1957, more than 300,000 Black children were attending formerly segregated schools. However, 2.4 million Black Southern children were still being educated in ‘Jim Crow’ schools. In 1957, Governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus, ordered the State National Guard to block nine Black students’ entry to Little Rock High School “to protect them” from a hostile white crowd. President Eisenhower had previously said the idea of the federal government using force to enforce Brown v. Topeka was ‘just plain nuts’. However, photographs and video of the events at Little Rock were published in media across the US and around the world. These images harmed the reputation of the US abroad (during the Cold War), so Eisenhower sent the US Army to Little Rock and federalized (took over) the State National Guard so that the Black students could attend Little Rock High School. Many Southern white Americans continued to oppose desegregation - in 1958, Faubus was 6 voted one of the ten most admired Americans and was re-elected as Governor of Arkansas.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 1: The development of the civil rights movement, 1954–60. 1.3 The Montgomery Bus Boycott and its impact, 1955–60 Segregation on public transport had long been a problem for Black Americans who were not allowed to sit with, or in front of, white passengers. This came to a head in Montgomery, Alabama, where local civil rights groups organised a year-long boycott Bus seating and the behaviour of white drivers was a long-standing problem in Montgomery, Alabama. On 1 December 1955, Rosa Parks, a civil rights activist, was arrested for refusing to give up her seat for a white man. A one-day bus boycott on 5 December, to protest against Parks’ arrest, was a huge success. That night the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) was set up with Martin Luther King chosen as its President. There was a lot of violence against Black Americans, including the bombing of the homes and churches of MIA leaders. The boycott lasted for 381 days, earned a lot of publicity and made Martin Luther King famous. He went on to set up the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). While the boycott was going on, the NAACP brought Browder v. Gayle to the state courts to desegregate Montgomery buses. The state court The Brown v. Topeka case and the Montgomery Bus Boycott led to increasing sympathy for civil rights in the USA. In 1957, Congress passed a Civil Rights Act which emphasised the right of all people to vote and said federal courts could prosecute state violations of voting rights. However, many Southern Democrats (Dixiecrats) opposed the 1957 Civil Rights Act and all- white juries in the South simply dismissed cases. As a result, only 3% more Black Americans were registered to vote by 1960. 1.4 Opposition to the civil rights movement Despite the progress made in the 1950s, there was much opposition to increased Black American rights across a range of areas, including within Congress (Senate and House of Representatives), state and local governments and racist organisations. The Ku Klux Klan was a violent organisation that used terror and violence to intimidate Black people across the South. Members of the Klan carried out lynchings and more then 2,000 people were lynched in the years 1865-1955. White Citizens’ Councils (WCC) were set up to fight Brown v. Topeka and campaigned against the NAACP. Some Councils distanced themselves from the violence of the KKK but others did not. The Councils also tried to prevent Black Americans from voting and held mass rallies to recruit members and shape public opinion. During the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Montgomery WCC pressured insurance agencies to cancel policies for church-owned vehicles, hoping to disrupt car-pooling. In 1956, over 100 Southern politicians signed the Southern Manifesto, a document rejecting the Brown v. Topeka decision. The manifesto encouraged state to resist any changes to segregation. The term ‘Dixiecrat’ was used to describe white Southern Democrats opposed to civil rights legislation. The Dixiecrats wanted to continue segregation and did not want any interference from the Federal Government when decisions about race had to be made. In 1957, Senator Strom Thurmond, a Dixiecrat, conducted the longest-ever filibuster (24 hours and 18 minutes) in an attempt to prevent the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights Bill. Democratic Presidents (like President Kennedy) acted cautiously to avoid upsetting the Dixiecrats as they didn’t want to risk losing votes in the South. 7 The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 Timeline Feb 1960 Greensboro sit-in Nov 1960 President Kennedy elected May 1961 First Freedom Ride and Anniston bomb attack June 1962 James Meredith case begins August 1963 Birmingham campaign begins in Birmingham, Alabama August 1963 March on Washington Nov 1963 President Kennedy assassinated – Johnson becomes President June 1964 Freedom Summer and Mississippi murders July 1964 Civil Rights Act passed Feb 1965 Malcolm X assassinated Aug 1965 Voting Rights Act passed Aug 1965 Watts ‘riots’ in Los Angeles Oct 1966 Black Panther Party set up Feb 1968 Kerner Report published Apr 1968 Martin Luther King assassinated Oct 1968 Black Power protest at Mexico Olympics Nov 1968 President Nixon elected 8  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 Key People President 1961-1963 [Democrat]. Supportive of civil rights but nervous President Kennedy of losing southern Democrats. Intervened in Freedom Rides & Birmingham; proposed civil rights bill. Police chief of Birmingham who responded brutally against freedom Bull Connor rides in 1961 and Birmingham protests in 1963. First black student at the University of Mississippi in 1962. Led the James Meredith March Against Fear in 1966. President 1963-1969 [Democrat]. Pushed for and signed the Civil President Johnson Rights Act & Voting Rights Act. Speaker and writer for the Nation of Islam and later the Pan-African Malcolm X Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU). After his assassination, his ideas inspired Black Power. Helped develop the Black Power movement as head of SNCC Stokely Carmichael (1966-67) and later as head of the All-African People's Revolutionary Party (A-APRP) President 1969-1974 [Republican]. Much less supportive of civil rights; President Nixon his ‘southern strategy’ aimed to win votes from racists in the South. 9  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 1 Progress, 1960–62 The Greensboro sit-in, 1960 During the late 1950s there were many instances of sit-ins, sit-down demonstrations and boycotts. These became known as ‘direct action’. Direct action often resulted in white violence, which resulted in many people (Black and white) siding with the Black activists. In 1960, in Greensboro, North Carolina, four black students from a local college demanded to be served at a whites-only lunch counter. When they were refused, they remained seated at the counter until the shop closed. More students joined the sit-ins and by the fifth day, there were 300 students taking part. During the sit-ins, the students had to endure violence, but they did not retaliate, adopting the same peaceful tactics that Martin Luther King had used at Montgomery. King visited Greensboro at the height of the sit-ins. When some students were arrested during the sit-in, students then boycotted any shop in Greensboro that had segregated lunch counters. Sales immediately dropped and eventually segregation ended. Sit-ins very quickly became a tool of protest, especially in cities where there were many students and places where there had been some progress in civil rights. Following the success of the sit-ins, in April 1960, students from across the South set up the SNCC (Student Non-violent Co-ordinating Committee) which continued using direct action and played a key role in the key events of the early 1960s, including sit-ins, Freedom Rides, the march on Washington and the ‘Freedom Summer’. The Freedom Riders, 1961 In December 1960, the Supreme Court ruled that all interstate bus stations and terminals should be desegregated. Activists from CORE (the Congress on Racial Equality) wanted to highlight that the Supreme Court decision was not being implemented in the South. In May 1961, 13 Freedom Riders (seven Black and six white), left Washington D.C. by bus to travel to New Orleans, Louisiana. Initially, there was little trouble on the first part of the journey, even when the Black Freedom Riders used whites-only facilities. But opposition increased once the Freedom Riders arrived in Alabama. In Alabama, one of the buses was firebombed outside Anniston and attacked by a white mob, many of whom were KKK members, who held the doors of the bus shut and then attacked the riders with weapons when they tried to flee. In Birmingham and Montgomery (both Alabama), the Freedom Riders were attacked by white racists – the Birmingham police chief, ‘Bull’ Connor had given most police the day off. When the Freedom Riders arrived in Jackson, Mississippi, they were immediately arrested when they tried to use the whites-only waiting room. Following the arrest of the Freedom Riders, activists from SNCC joined the protest – the riders continued throughout the summer and more than 300 of them were imprisoned in Jackson. The Kennedy government intervened and racial segregation was banned in interstate travel facilities. The Freedom Rides were successful because they raised awareness of the civil rights campaign – images were seen across the USA and showed that more and more young white people were 10 supporting the civil rights movement.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 1 Progress, 1960–62 James Meredith and ‘Ole Miss’, 1962 In 1960, John F. Kennedy, narrowly won the presidential election (helped by the votes of Black Americans). There was an expectation that he would support the demand for civil rights. In June 1962, the Supreme Court ruled to force the University of Mississippi (‘Ole Miss’) to accept James Meredith as a student. When university officials and the state governor physically stopped Meredith from registering, President Kennedy sent in 320 federal marshals to escort Meredith to the campus. A white mob of over 3,000 people attacked the federal marshals. Two people were killed as well as 166 marshals and 210 demonstrators being injured. In response, President Kennedy sent in over 2,000 troops to restore order. 300 soldiers had to remain on campus until Meredith received his degree one year later (he had completed two years at another university). Bob Dylan, a famous white singer who supported the civil rights movement, wrote a song about the James Meredith case called ‘Oxford Town’ Across the South, there continued to be some resistance to integration in education, but Kennedy’s intervention had shown that the federal government would definitely intervene to enforce integration. 2 Peaceful protests and their impact, 1963–65 The Birmingham Campaign, 1963 In 1963 there was still no federal law requiring Southern states to integrate public facilities. According to King, Birmingham, Alabama was “the most segregated city in America”. 40% of the city’s residents were Black but all public facilities were segregated – when a court had ordered desegregation of the city’s parks, playgrounds and swimming pools, the city government had chosen to close them instead. Black residents had limited job opportunities – there were no Black police officers, firefighters or bus drivers. The city was nicknamed ‘Bombingham’ due to frequent bombings of Black churches, homes and businesses. In April 1963, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) decided to use sit-ins and marches to challenge segregation in Birmingham. They knew that the segregationist police chief, ‘Bull Connor’ would likely be provoked into using violence against peaceful protestors. The demonstrations began with hundreds of protestors taking part and then being arrested. King himself, was arrested on 12 April and jailed. In his 8-day stay in prison, King wrote “Letter from Birmingham Jail”, a document setting out why the Black community was taking action. As many of the activists had been imprisoned, SCLC leaders decided to recruit students and children to participate in the demonstrations. Police Chief Bull Connor allowed his men to set dogs on the protestors and use powerful water hoses. Around 2,000 demonstrators were put in jail and 1,300 children were arrested. Television crews and newspaper photographers captured the police violence and the images were seen across the USA and around the world. President Kennedy said it made him feel sick and ashamed. President Kennedy sent his Assistant Attorney General to mediate and find a solution – on 9 May, King and Birmingham city leaders agreed that desegregation would take place within 90 11 days. A month letter, Kennedy committed to supporting a new federal Civil Rights Bill that would make segregation illegal.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 2 Peaceful protests and their impact, 1963–65 The March on Washington, 1963 After the Birmingham Campaign, civil rights groups (NAACP, CORE, SNCC and SCLC) wanted to maintain momentum for change and put pressure on President Kennedy and Congress to pass the Civil Rights Bill. The groups organised a huge march, the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, in Washington D.C. on 28 August 1963. President Kennedy feared violence and asked King and the organises to cancel the march but they decided to continue. When the march took place, around 250,000 people (including 80,000 white people) attended from all over the USA. Whenever senators and congressmen were seen, the crowds chanted “Pass the bill”, encouraging them to pass Kennedy’s Civil Rights Bill. Bob Dylan and other protest singers sang songs, expressing their support. The final speaker of the day was Martin Luther King, who gave his “I have a dream” speech where he quoted from the American Declaration of Independence and described his hopes for racial equality in the USA. The March on Washington was seen as a great success – it was televised across the USA, brought together different sections of society and put further pressure on President Kennedy to try to progress the Civil Rights Bill. After the march, King and the other leaders met President Kennedy who confirmed his commitment to the Civil Rights Bill. However, there was still little actual progress: no Senator who opposed the Civil Rights Bill changed his mind and in September, four black girls were killed by a bomb attack while attending Sunday school in Birmingham, reminding activists of the scale of opposition. The Freedom Summer, 1964 In 1964, the SNCC, CORE and the NAACP worked together to organise the Freedom Summer. The aim of the Freedom Summer was to increase the number of registered voters in Mississippi, which had the lowest number of registered Black voters in the USA (around 7%), by teaching people how to pass the voter registration tests. The organisers also established 30 Freedom Schools in towns throughout Mississippi where they taught black history and the philosophy of the civil rights movement – almost 70,000 students attended by the end of the year. Schools and volunteers were targeted by white racists – more than 30 churches were bombed. In June 1964, three volunteers – James Chaney and his two white colleagues, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner – were arrested while investigating a church bombing. The policeman who arrested them was a member of the Ku Klux Klan who informed other Klan members when they were due to be released. Chaney, Goodman and Schwerer were brutally murdered and their bodies were not found until six weeks later. Many Americans were horrified by the events and President Johnson promised to find the murderers and continued working to pass a Civil Rights Bill, which passed on 2 July 1964. Many involved in the Freedom Summer saw their actions as successful because 1,600 more Black Americans registered to vote in Mississippi and in 1965, a Voting Rights Act was passed. However, over 17,000 Black Americans had tried to register to vote in Mississippi and some activists felt there had only been such publicity of the murders because two of the victims were white. As a result, some black American participants in the Freedom Summer began to question the usefulness of working with white Americans and whether non-violent methods could 12 achieve the aims of the civil rights movement.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 2 Peaceful protests and their impact, 1963–65 The Civil Rights Act, 1964 Following the death of President Kennedy, President Johnson took over as president. Johnson was a Southern Democrat (from Texas) who supported civil rights whereas most Southern Democrats remained opposed to the Civil Rights Bill. Johnson put forward his vision of a ‘Great Society’ which would attack racial injustice and poverty. Johnson was a very experienced and persuasive politician who was able to convince enough Republicans to support the Civil Rights Bill so that it passed and became law. The 1964 Civil Rights Act banned segregation in hotels, restaurants, and theatres, and gave the federal government the power to force school desegregation. The Act made the federal government responsible for bringing cases to court where discrimination still occurred. The Civil Rights Act is often seen as President Johnson’s greatest achievement, but many Black Americans felt it did not go far enough and many white Southerners were very angry and stopped supporting the Democrats. Selma and the Voting Rights Act, 1965 The 1964 Civil Rights Act did not address the difficulties that Black Americans faced in being able to vote. Therefore, Martin Luther King and the SCLC decided to launch a non-violent campaign for voting rights for Black Americans. The focus for the campaign was the town of Selma, Alabama where just 383 out of 15,000 Black Americans had been able to register to vote. Selma’s sheriff, Jim Clark, had a notorious reputation for harsh violence. Over two months, Black Americans tried to register to vote in Selma and were rejected. King and his followers were beaten and arrested, and one demonstrator was murdered. King and his followers decided to hold a march from Selma to the state capital, Montgomery to present a petition asking for voting rights to the state Governor. The Governor banned the march but the marchers decided to continue. As the march left Selma, the marchers were stopped on Edmund Pettus Bridge and attacked by Sherrif Clark’s men and state troopers with tear gas and clubs. The marchers had to return to Selma and the event became known as ‘Bloody Sunday’. Following the events at Selma, President Johnson decided to introduce a bill to protect voting rights for Black Americans. Eventually, King was able to lead a march from Selma to Montgomery as long as it was peaceful – King led 25,000 people – the biggest march ever in the South. In the summer of 1965, President Johnson persuaded Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act which ended literacy tests and gave federal officials the power to run voter registration in any state where fewer than half of a state’s population were able to vote. By the end of 1965, 250,000 Black Americans had registered to vote and a further 750,000 registered by the end of 1968. Many people thought the passing of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act represented a great success for Martin Luther King’s non-violent approach. However, some Black Americans felt that there was too little progress and it was too slow – they 13 felt King had made too many deals with white authorities and wanted more radical action.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 3 Malcolm X and Black Power, 1963–70 Malcolm X Some in the civil rights movement felt that progress was too slow and that King’s methods would never bring true equality. A group that never accepted King’s ideas was the Nation of Islam – its supporters openly sought separatism. The most famous member of the Nation of Islam was Malcolm X – his powerful speeches helped membership grow to 100,000. Malcolm X helped set up educational and social programmes aimed at Black youths in the ghettoes. By 1960, 75% of members of the Nation of Islam were under 35. Malcolm X criticised King and called the 1963 March on Washington, the ‘farce on Washington’. Malcolm X felt that violence could be justified in self-defence, but also to secure a separate Black nation. In 1964, after a visit to Mecca, Malcolm X changed his views. Having seen Muslims of different races interacting as equals, he came to believe that racial discrimination could be overcome by people of different races working together. Following his change of view, Malcolm X left the Nation of Islam and the organisation deemed him to be an enemy. In 1965 Malcolm X was assassinated by members of the Nation of Islam – 15,000 people went to his funeral. Stokely Carmichael and Black Power During the years 1965-67, there were riots in many cities across the USA, with the worst in the Watts district of Los Angeles where more than 30 people died, hundreds of people were arrested and there was millions of dollars of damage. Stokely Carmichael and others in the SNCC were responding to this situation and started using Black Power as a political slogan. It evolved to cover a wide range of activities aiming to increase the power of Black Americans. Carmichael and his supporters wanted Black Americans to take responsibility for improving their own lives and reject white help. Carmichael and his followers wanted Black Americans to have pride in their heritage – they often wore African dress and appearance and adopted the slogan ‘Black is beautiful’. The Black Power movement gained great publicity at the 1968 Mexico Olympics when Tommie Smith and John Carlos gave the Black Power salute at the 200m medal ceremony. Smith also wore no shoes at the ceremony to represent Black poverty in the USA. In response, Smith and Carlos were banned from the athlete’s village, accused of bringing ‘politics’ into sport and received several death threats. However, their protest meant that people around the world became aware of the Black Power movement. The Black Panthers An example of Black Power was the Black Panther Party, founded by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale in 1966. The Black Panthers were influenced by Malcolm X and issued a ten-point programme setting out their aims. The Panthers called for an end to capitalism and the establishment of a socialist society. They were prepared to use revolutionary means to achieve their aims – they wore uniforms and were ready to use weapons. By 1968 they had 5,000 members. The Black Panthers worked to improve life for people in Black communities. They patrolled the streets in Black communities to promote safety, established the ‘Free Breakfast for Children Program’, distributed clothing and gave guidance on drugs rehabilitation. 14 The Black Panthers were constantly targeted by the FBI and police.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 4 The civil rights movement, 1965–75 The ‘riots’ of 1965-67 and the Kerner Report, 1968 Despite the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, many young Black Americans living in the ghettoes were angry about high unemployment, continuing discrimination and poverty. In August 1965, following police violence towards a young Black man, this frustration exploded into a major riot in Watts, Los Angeles. The riot involved 30,000 people, left 34 dead, 1072 injured, 4,000 arrested and caused $40 million worth of damage. Martin Luther King visited Watts and was shocked by what he saw – he felt that much of his work promoting non-violence had been undone and was clearly not reaching many young Black Americans. There were further riots across US cities in 1966 and 1967- they were usually triggered by the arrest of a Black youth and rumours of police brutality. The two largest riots occurred in Newark (26 dead and over 1,000 injured) and Detroit (more than 40 dead, hundreds injured and 7,000 arrested). During three summers of riots between 1965 and 1967, more than 130 people were killed and the damage totalled $700 million. President Johnson said the riots were a ‘cry for help’ ordered the Kerner Report, an investigation into the causes of the riots. The Kerner Report concluded that racism was deeply embedded in American society – it highlighted the economic challenges facing Black Americans, but also the systematic police bias and brutality. The Kerner Report recommended federal projects to improve life for Black Americans, but following the election of President Nixon in 1968, the report was largely ignored. King’s campaign in the North By the mid-1960s, King and some of the SCLC felt they had not won the support of many Black Americans in the North. King started to expand his definition of ‘freedom’: whereas originally King had focused on voting rights and ending segregation in the South, he now started to focus on ending poverty and inequality for Black Americans in the North too. In January 1966, King and his supports set up the Chicago Freedom Movement, which aimed to address the issues of poor housing and education as well as high unemployment. King’s desire for a fairer and more equal distribution of wealth was criticised by many white Americans who said his views were too extreme and almost communist. Many Northern whites (including churches) had supported desegregation in the South but did not support economic and social changes that would mean they would have to pay higher taxes, King used the same methods as in the past, especially peaceful marches and publicity but these were less successful. When 500 Black Americans marched into a white Chicago neighbourhood to highlight that they were unable to live there, white residents threw rocks and bottes at them and the police gave little protection. On 4 April 1968, Martin Luther King was visiting Memphis, Tennessee, in support of Black refuse collectors who were striking for equal treatment with their white co-workers. When King was stood on the balcony of his motel he was assassinated, most likely by James Earl Ray, a white racist. Following King’s death, there was a final outburst of rioting across the country in more than 100 cities: 46 people died, more than 3,000 were injured, 21,000 people were arrested and $70 million worth of damage was done. After the Civil Rights Act (1964) and Voting Rights Act (1965) had been passed, white support15 for the civil rights movement had been declining, and this decline continued after King’s death.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 2: Protest, progress and radicalism, 1960–75 4 The civil rights movement, 1965–75 The extent of progress in civil rights by 1975 Richard Nixon was elected President in 1968 and showed little sympathy or support for the civil rights movement. He made no attempt to meet Black leaders, was against having a national holiday to celebrate King’s birthday and dealt harshly with extreme groups such as the Black Panthers. Education - schools became more integrated – by 1974, only 8 percent of Southern Black children attended segregated schools. Some school districts introduced ‘busing’ where Black or white children would travel across their city to school to ensure that schools were racially- mixed, even when neighbourhoods were not. President Nixon opposed busing but in 1971, the Supreme Court ruled that it was an appropriate way to desegregate schools. Employment and business - in 1972, President Nixon set up the Office of Minority Business Enterprise to encourage Black businesses. Unemployment for Black Americans had decreased, but Black Americans were still almost twice as likely to be unemployed as whites (three times more likely for teenagers). Poverty - improvements in education and employment meant that the number of Black Americans living in poverty almost halved during the 1960s. However, Black Americans were still three times more likely to be living in poverty than white Americans. Politics – in 1973, more than 200 Black Americans were elected to state legislatures and 16 had been elected to Congress (Andrew Young was one of the first). In 1973, Maynard Jackson was the first elected mayor of a major Southern City in Atlanta, Georgia. However, in the 1976 presidential election, more than one third of African Americans did not register to vote, with only a quarter of young (under 25) Black Americans actually voting. 16  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 3: US involvement in the Vietnam War, 1954-75 Why did the USA first become involved in the conflict in Vietnam? Before the Second World War, France ruled an area of Southeast Asia known as French Indo- China. This area included modern-day Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. French rule was harsh and unpopular During the Second World War, Japan invaded and occupied Indo-China. Some in Vietnam saw this as an opportunity to overthrow French rule and gain independence. A Vietnamese communist, Ho Chi Minh, set up the Vietminh movement to fight for an independent Vietnam. The Vietminh, with training and equipment from the US Intelligence Service, began guerilla operations against the Japanese. In 1945, after the end of the Second World War, Ho Chi Minh quickly occupied the two key cities of Hanoi and Saigon and announced that Vietnam was an independent country. Within weeks, however, the French sent 50,000 troops to regain control over South Vietnam (where the Vietminh were less strong) and force Ho Chi Minh and his followers into the jungles of North Vietnam. The Vietminh now fought another guerrilla war, this time against the French (supported by some anti-communist Vietnamese). Events in Vietnam now became part of the wider Cold War – the rivalry between the superpowers America (and the West) and the Soviet Union (and other communist countries). As part of this, the USA began a policy of containment – a commitment to stop the spread of communism. However, in 1949, a communist government was established in China and began supplying the Vietminh with arms, equipment and training. America, fearing the further spread of communism across Asia, switched to supporting the French against the Vietminh with money, military vehicles and military advisers. The Vietminh eventually started carrying out larger attacks on well-defended French positions. In 1954, the Vietminh surrounded and attacked the French military camp of Dien Bien Phu, forcing the French to surrender. Soon after, the French agreed to leave Indo-China. In 1954, various countries met in Geneva (Switzerland) to decide Vietnam’s future. Vietnam was temporarily divided along the 17th parallel into North Vietnam (led by Ho Chi Minh) and South Vietnam (led by Ngo Dinh Diem). There were to elections in 1956 to elect a government for the whole of Vietnam and reunite the country. Why did the USA become more involved in the conflict in Vietnam under Eisenhower? President Eisenhower believed that Ho Chi Minh would win an election and create a united, communist Vietnam (supported by China). Eisenhower feared that if South Vietnam became communist then it could be followed by Laos, Cambodia and other Asian countries (known as the ‘domino theory’). Therefore, Eisenhower was determined to stop the spread of communism to South Vietnam. To stop the spread of communism, Eisenhower supported Diem’s government in South Vietnam (even though he was elected President in a rigged election). The USA supported Diem in refusing to allow the 1956 election agreed at Geneva, and sent aid and military advisers to train the South Vietnamese army. Diem’s government was not popular in South Vietnam. Diem was a Catholic while most Vietnamese were Buddhists, and even persecuted Buddhists (e.g. banning the flying of the Buddhist flag on Buddha’s birthday). He took land from peasants and gave it to his own supporters, who then made the peasant tenants pay high taxes. Diem’s government hunted down supporters of the Vietminh in the South, ‘re-educating’ them in prison camps or executing them. In response, the communist government in the North encouraged a terror campaign against South Vietnamese officials. Former members of the Vietminh in the South, supported by Ho Chi Minh, also set up the National Liberation Front17 in 1960 to oppose Diem, and began a guerrilla campaign against his government.  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 3: US involvement in the Vietnam War, 1954-75 Why did the USA become even more involved in the conflict in Vietnam under Kennedy? To Diem and the USA, all opposition to the South Vietnamese government was communist. The opposition was labelled the ‘Vietcong’ (a term of abuse). Kennedy was elected President in 1960 and was determined to prevent the spread of communism in Asia. He decided to increase US involvement in Vietnam to support Diem’s regime and defeat the Vietcong. The US increased the number of military experts training the South Vietnamese army (ARVN) to 16,000 (including the US Army’s Special Forces, the Green Berets), and equipped an additional 20,000 troops for the ARVN. In 1961, the US spent $270 million in military support for Diem. Kennedy realised that Diem was too unpopular to defeat the Vietcong so the US government supported a plot by leading generals to overthrow Diem in 1963. However, the leaders who followed Diem didn’t last long. Meanwhile, Diem’s unpopularity had led to increasing support for the Vietcong in the South, and the number of guerrilla attacks increased (with support from China). Although the ARVN greatly outnumbered the Vietcong (and had US aid), the ARVN was unable to defeat them due to the Vietcong’s guerrilla tactics and the support they received from villages in South Vietnam. Therefore, in 1962, the USA developed the Strategic Hamlet Program – this involved moving Vietnamese peasants into fortified villages, guarded by troops, so they could not be persuaded into supporting the Vietcong. It was also hoped that this policy would make the peasants feel greater loyalty to the South Vietnamese government. However, the Strategic Hamlet Program actually increased support for the Vietcong. Many peasants were angry about being forcibly moved away from their land and family burial sites and so turned against the South Vietnamese government and began supporting the National Liberation Front. As opposition to the South Vietnamese government grew, Kennedy agreed to send more military support – including aircraft, intelligence equipment and more advisers – but not combat troops. Why did US involvement in the conflict in Vietnam escalate under Johnson? At first, Johnson wanted to expand America’s advisory role rather than send combat troops to South Vietnam. However, it soon became clear that more direct US involvement would be needed to defeat the Vietcong. By 1964, there were nearly 60,000 guerrilla groups operating in South Vietnam, supplied by the Ho Chi Minh trail that ran from North Vietnam to the Vietcong in the South. 35% of South Vietnam was controlled by the Vietcong. Johnsons needed to convince Congress and the US public that America should send more direct support to the ARVM. In 1964, the US destroyer Maddox was shot at by North Vietnamese patrol boats in the Gulf of Tonkin while gathering intelligence information. Johnson used the attack to persuade Congress to support greater US involvement in Vietnam. Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which gave Johnson the power to take any military action he thought necessary to defend South Vietnam. At first, Johnson used the resolution to increase air support and attacks. However, this changed after two elite battalions of South Vietnamese troops were defeated by Vietcong ambushes and US air bases were attacked. In March 1965, the first US combat troops arrived in Vietnam to protect US air bases. By the end of the year, there were 200,000 US combat troops, and half a million by 1968. 18  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 3: US involvement in the Vietnam War, 1954-75 How did North Vietnam and the Vietcong fight against the USA and South Vietnam? The Vietcong mainly used guerrilla tactics to fight the war in the South as the strength of US resources meant that the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) and Vietcong were no match for the USA and the ARVN in open warfare. Guerrilla tactics also allowed the Vietcong to make the most their superior knowledge of the jungles of South Vietnam. They attacked and then disappeared into the jungle, villages or tunnels. The Vietcong relied on the support of the South Vietnamese peasantry, who were expected to hide them. Vietcong fighters were expected to be respectful to the villagers and even help the peasants in the fields during busy periods. However, the Vietcong also killed peasants who opposed them or worked with their enemies, and killed employees of the South Vietnam government (police, tax collectors, teachers etc.). The aim of guerrilla tactics was to wear down enemy soldiers and reduce their morale. The Vietcong achieved this by making US soldiers live in constant fear of ambushes and booby traps (e.g. sharpened bamboo sticks hidden in pits). The Vietcong were also impossible to identify as they had no uniform or base camps. They worked in small groups and were hard to distinguish from peasants in the villages. The Vietcong dug deep tunnels and used them as air-raid shelters during US bombing raids. Some tunnel systems ran for hundreds of miles. The tunnels included workshops, hospitals, kitchens, supplies and places to sleep. They were very narrow and filled with booby traps, making them difficult for the Americans to attack. How did the USA fight against the Vietcong and North Vietnam? The USA’s military strategy was intended to make the most of their superior air power, artillery and equipment, and aimed to kill large numbers of the enemy. In 1965, the USA launched Operation Rolling Thunder – a widespread bombing campaign in North Vietnam which ended up lasting for more than 3 years. The bombing caused considerable damage in North Vietnam and disrupted supply routes to the Vietcong. However, it encouraged even more North Vietnamese people to support the war effort against America, it didn’t completely stop supplies to the Vietcong and it was hugely expensive for the USA. As the USA couldn’t force the Vietcong into battle, chemical weapons were used to destroy the jungle that hid the Vietcong and their supplies. This included Agent Orange (a highly toxic weedkiller) and napalm (a bomb that showered victims with burning petroleum jelly). These chemical weapons had little impact on revealing the Vietcong, and actually increased support for the Vietcong amongst South Vietnamese villagers. At first, US combat troops were mainly used to defend American air bases in South Vietnam, to make the use of US troops more acceptable to the American public. When US forces did fight the first battle against the North Vietnam Army at La Drang Valley in 1965, the US public did not accept the number of American losses (even though this was much smaller than the number of North Vietnamese casualties). President Johnson soon gave General Westmoreland permission to adopt more aggressive tactics, known as Search and Destroy. Using helicopters, US and South Vietnamese forces would descend on a village suspected of assisting the Vietcong and destroy it. These raids killed some Vietcong fighters, but also many civilians, and incorrect information often meant that innocent villages were destroyed. This made the USA and South Vietnamese Army unpopular with many South Vietnamese peasants. US troops also often walked into traps during the raids, resulting in American casualties. 19  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 4: Reactions to, and the end of, US involvement in Vietnam Why did opposition to the war in the USA grow in the mid/late 1960s? From the mid 1960s, many Americans began to turn against the war because of the footage they saw on TV, the amount of money being spent on America’s war effort and the increasing number of American casualties. President Johnson had promised a ‘Great society’ – a series of measures to reduce unemployment and improve healthcare and education – but this was pushed to the side as so much money was spent on the war effort. People from many different groups in American society opposed American involvement in the Vietnam War. Some politicians opposed support being given to the corrupt government in South Vietnam. Some returning soldiers were horrified by what they had experienced. Many black Americans felt that addressing segregation and inequality in the USA itself was more important than involvement in a war thousands of miles away, and many were angry that the proportion of black Americans conscripted to fight in Vietnam was higher than the proportion of white Americans. Many young Americans and students had begun to protest against the government even before the USA sent troops to Vietnam. This ‘student movement’ felt that the older generation (and the government) were out of touch with the issues affecting Americans, and the movement was encouraged by protest singers like Bob Dylan. A lot of students felt that the Vietnam War was another example of the government abusing its power and not acting in the interests of the American population. Many Americans questioned the reasons for US involvement in Vietnam. The government claimed it was a war to protect democracy and freedom in South Vietnam against the spread of communism. However, Diem’s government had been corrupt, unpopular and undemocratic. Some Americans believed the USA was fighting to support a military dictatorship. In South Vietnam. Government documents (called the Pentagon Papers) released in 1971 showed that the government had lied to the public about Vietnam. Anti-war protestors campaigned against conscription (known in America as ‘the draft’). Some were excused from being called up to fight, but this seemed to favour the wealthy middle class. A much higher proportion of black and working-class Americans were called up. The boxer Muhammad Ali was stripped of his world title for refusing to fight when called up. An organisation was formed to advise people on how to avoid conscription, whilst some burnt their draft cards in protest. In March 1968, a group of American soldiers (called Charlie Company) were ordered to attack a group of Vietcong soldiers. However, Charlie Company attacked and wiped out the village of My Lai, in a massacre that killed at least 347 men, women and children. At first, the US military tried to keep news of the My Lai massacre quiet, but a soldier heard about it and wrote a letter to the government. The My Lai massacre gained a huge amount of publicity. A journalist wrote about the massacre and the leader of Charlie Company (Lt Calley) was put on trial and found guilty. My Lai shocked US public opinion and more than 500,000 anti-war protesters demonstrated in Washington – the largest political protest in American history. Protests against the war grew stronger in 1970 when Nixon ordered the invasion of Cambodia. Many of the protests were organised by college students. National Guardsmen were sent to stop the protests at Kent State University and used tear gas to move them. When students refused to move shots were fired – four people were killed and 11 injured. The press was horrified and 2 million students went on strike in protest. 20  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 4: Reactions to, and the end of, US involvement in Vietnam Why did the Tet Offensive (1968) increase opposition to the war? In January 1968, the Vietcong launched a massive attack on over 100 cities and towns in South Vietnam. The attack was launched during the New Year, or ‘Tet’, holiday as the Vietcong knew half the ARVN would be on leave. The Vietcong hoped that a successful offensive would increase opposition to the war in America and increase support in South Vietnam. The Vietcong made advances into many towns and cities,. 15 Vietcong guerillas even fought their way into the US Embassy in Saigon and held out for 5 hours before the building was recaptured. The whole events was shown live on US TV. The Vietcong also captured the major northern city of Hué and held it for 25 days. The Tet Offensive showed that the Vietcong could strike at the heart of American territory. It weakened the morale of the US military, increased opposition to the war in America and suggested to the US public that the war was unwinnable. How much support was there for the war? Those who opposed the war got lots of publicity, but there was still a large number of Americans who supported the war. In 1964, 85% of Americans supported government policy in Vietnam. As late as 1970, an opinion poll showed that 50% still supported the war and only 35% opposed it. Many Americans supported the war due to their fear of communism spreading – especially after the spread of communism in Eastern Europe and China becoming communist. Some American politicians increased this fear of communism by claiming that there were communist spies in America. Many Americans believed in the domino theory and thought that communism would spread to Cambodia and Laos if Vietnam became communist. The phrase ‘silent majority’ began to be used, including by President Nixon to describe supporters of the war. Nixon claimed that opponents of the war dominated the media, but this did not represent how most Americans felt (especially the middle aged and elderly). Many Americans working in building / construction supported Nixon’s policy in Vietnam and were nicknamed ‘hard hats. Nixon said they were supporting ‘freedom and patriotism’. When anti-war protesters held a demonstration to remember the four students killed at Kent State University, the hard hats held their own demonstration to show support for Nixon’s policies. 200 ‘hard hats’ attacked the students, and witnesses said the police did little to stop the violence. More than 70 people were injured. 21  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 3: US involvement in the Vietnam War, 1954-75 How did American involvement in the Vietnam War change under President Nixon (1969-73)? By 1969, more than 36,000 members of the US military had been killed in Vietnam. President Nixon introduced his plan to end US involvement in Vietnam – a policy called Vietnamisation. The policy of Vietnamisation involved withdrawing US troops and getting the South Vietnamese to take on more responsibility for the fighting. The US planned to train and equip South Vietnamese soldiers so they could take the place of American soldiers. The US would continue to provide financial and military aid to South Vietnam, and use the US air force to support ground troops. In June 1969, Nixon announced the withdrawal of the first 25,000 US troops from Vietnam. The Vietnamisation strategy did not work as the ARVN was no match for the communist forces. Nixon’s advisers told him that the withdrawal of US troops would lead to a Vietcong victory. It was agreed that the only way to avoid a humiliating defeat was to negotiate a peace agreement.. At the Paris peace talks, the Americans used the ‘madman’ theory in an attempt to scare North Vietnam into accepting peace terms – this was the attempt to convince the North Vietnam government that Nixon hated communism so much he was planning to use nuclear weapons. 22  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 4: Reactions to, and the end of, US involvement in Vietnam How and why did American involvement in Vietnam end? Following the Tet Offensive in 1968, peace talks began in Paris. The USA wanted South Vietnam to be independent and non-communist. North Vietnam wanted Vietnam reunified as one country and expected a communist government to be elected. They would not accept any government led by the current President of South Vietnam, Thieu. So there were huge areas of disagreement: Whether / how to unite Vietnam Who would govern South Vietnam (the government the USA supported, or the National Liberation Front?) Withdrawal of US and North Vietnamese troops from South Vietnam At first, the Paris peace talks went nowhere. Nixon began separate talks with China and the USSR, hoping to end the Cold War. As a result, the North Vietnamese, fearing they would lose Chinese and Soviet support, agreed to secret talks with the USA in 1970. Nixon wanted to appear willing to negotiate, but also strong enough that he wouldn’t be pushed into accepting unfavourable peace terms. From 1970, he kept pressure on the North Vietnamese to agree peace by: Continuing the process of Vietnamisation Continuing (and expanding) bombing campaigns Continuing meetings with the USSR and China (who pressed N. Vietnam to make peace) However, Nixon (and the US) was also desperate for peace due to: Cost of the war and number of American casualties Growing opposition in America and worldwide There was no victory in sight Reduced support and funding from Congress e.g. Congress repealed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution after Nixon approved the bombing of Cambodia and set a deadline (1971) for the final withdrawal of all US troops In October 1972, the USA and North Vietnam produced an agreement at the official Paris peace talks (which they had agreed in their secret meetings). However, President Thieu refused to sign as he was furious he had had no part in the discussions. The talks broke up with the agreement unsigned. Nixon used various methods to get the talks to restart in 1973: The USA resumed heavy bombing of N. Vietnam, particularly Hanoi (for 12 days, the US launched the biggest aerial attack of the war – more than 1,600 civilians died) Nixon persuaded Thieu to come to the talks by promising an immediate delivery of weapons and supplies Encouraging China and the USSR to press the North Vietnamese to reach an agreement A ceasefire was signed in January 1973. President Thieu had no choice but to sign it as US troops were leaving Vietnam (Congress would not grant further funds for the war) – though Nixon assured Thieu that the US would help if N. Vietnam violated the agreement. But Thieu still objected that N. Vietnamese troops were allowed to remain in areas they controlled in the South. The Paris Peace Accords were signed by the USA, N. Vietnam, S. Vietnam and the National Liberation Front. All countries accepted Vietnam as a single country, and a new government would be elected. US troops, equipment and advisers were to be withdrawn within 60 days, and there was to be no more US aid to the ARVN. 23  The USA, 1954-1975: conflict at home and abroad Key Topic 4: Reactions to, and the end of, US involvement in Vietnam Significance of the Paris Peace Accords The Paris Peace Accords gave the USA a way to leave the war – by 23 March 1973, there were only 150 US Marines left in Vietnam, guarding the US embassy. However, both the North Vietnamese and South Vietnamese saw ‘the peace’ as a brief ceasefire while the Americans withdrew. South Vietnam’s economy collapsed with the loss of US aid. President Thieu also failed to make the government more democratic or replace corrupt officials in villages. Therefore, the Vietcong were soon strong in the countryside again – Thieu refused to negotiate or work with the communists. North Vietnam continued to send troops and supplies down the Ho Chi Minh Trail and launched a massive attack in December 1974. President Thieu asked for equipment and financial support from the US, but Congress refused any funding (other than to evacuate US citizens). Saigon was captured in April 1975, and the government of North Vietnam united both North and South to form the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. 24  Guidance on answering exam questions Question 1: Give two things from Source A you can infer about… [4 marks] ✓ Identify two things the source suggests (this must go beyond the surface level of what the source directly tells or shows you) ✓ Include a specific detail from the source (e.g. a short quotation or a detail from the image) which has led you to your inference (sensible guess) Question 2: Explain why… [12 marks] ✓ Aim for three paragraphs, each explaining a difference reason for the event in the question. Question 3(a): How useful are Sources A and B for an enquiry into …… ? Explain your answer, using Sources A and B and your own knowledge of the historical context. [8 marks] ✓ Write one paragraph on each source ✓ Identify what you can learn from the source – use quotations / details from the image to support your explanation ✓ Include your own knowledge to explain / develop / support points in the source ✓ Explain how the provenance (i.e. origins) of the source make it more or less useful for the enquiry. E.g. is the source typical? Whose perspective does / doesn’t the source give? What might the author have exaggerated, or downplayed / ignored, and why? Question 3(b): Study Interpretations 1 and 2. They give different views about … What is the main difference between these views? Explain your answer, giving details from both interpretations. [4 marks] Interpretation 1 argues that… whereas Interpretation 2 argues that… For example, Interpretation 1 says “…” In contrast, Interpretation 2 says “…” Therefore, the main difference between these views is… 25  Guidance on answering exam questions Question 3(c): Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about … You may use Sources B and C to help explain your answer. [4 marks] Interpretations 1 and 2 might give different views about whether US involvement was necessary because the historians have used different sources. For example, the author of interpretation 1 might have used Source X as it talks about “…” which closely links to Interpretation 1’s claims that… The author of Interpretation 2 might have used Source Y as they both focus on… Source Y says “…” closely linking to Interpretation 2’s claim that… Question 3(d): How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about …? Explain your answer using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. [16 marks] ✓ Decide which interpretation you agree with more before starting your answer ✓ Write a 1-sentence introduction setting out which interpretation you find more convincing ✓ Write 2 paragraphs explaining why you agree with one of the interpretations ✓ Write 1 paragraph explaining why you agree less with the other interpretation ✓ Summarise your argument in a conclusion Introduction Whilst I agree to an extent with Interpretation X’s view that…, Interpretation Y’s argument that… is more convincing. Paragraphs 1 and 2: explaining which interpretation you agree with most, and why Interpretation Y presents the stronger argument that… For example, [historian’s name] argues that… [include quotation] This emphasises that… Moreover, Interpretation Y’s argument is supported by… [include your own knowledge and examples to support the claim being made in the quotation] Interpretation Y also highlights… by pointing out… [include a different quotation] This further emphasises… This argument can be supported by… Therefore, I agree with Interpretation Y’s view that… Paragraph 3: explaining the interpretation you find less convincing, and why Although Interpretation X’s argument that __________ is less convincing overall, some of the individual points can still be supported. For example, [historian’s name] argues… [include quote] This emphasises that… Moreover, Interpretation X’s argument is supported by… [include your own knowledge and examples to support the claim being made in the quotation] However, Interpretation X’s argument is less convincing overall because it exaggerates / downplays / ignores… [use quotations and your own knowledge to explain] 26  PRACTICE QUESTIONS Source inference: Given two things you can infer from Source X about ZZZ (4). Explain why (12): Black Americans were treated as inferior in the 1950s. there was progress in education for Black Americans in the 1950s. the Montgomery Bus Boycott succeeded in achieving its aims. there was opposition to the civil rights movement in the years 1954–60. it was difficult for Black people to stand up for their civil rights in southern states in the late 1950s. tactics used by the civil rights movement changed in the years 1960-63. there was progress in the civil rights movement in the years 1963-65. the civil rights movement changed to more extreme methods in the years 1963-70. there were changes in the civil rights movement in the years 1965-75. Source utility: How useful are Sources X and Y for an enquiry into ZZZ? (8) Difference between interpretations: Study Interpretations 1 and 2. They give different views about ZZZ. What is the main difference between these views? (4) Why interpretations differ: Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about ZZZ. You may use Sources X and Y to help explain your answer. (4) Essay using interpretations: How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about ZZZ? Explain your answer, using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. (16) 27  SOURCES AND INTERPRETATIONS 1.1 The position of Black Americans in the early 1950s Source B: A photograph taken by Elliot Erwitt in 1950 in North Carolina, USA. Elliot Erwitt was a French- American photographer. Source C: A photograph of troops trying to hold back 4,000 white Americans who attacked an apartment building an African American family had recently moved into in Cicero, Illinois, a Chicago suburb in 1951. Interpretation 1: From Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945-1974 (1996) by James T. Patterson. Black people in the South still struggled in a Jim Crow society that segregated everything from schools and buses to bathrooms, beaches, and drinking fountains. Despite campaigns by Black activists for voting rights, only a token few Black people in the Deep South states were permitted to register to vote. Daily humiliations continued to remind Black people of their third-class status. Whites never address Black men as “mister” but rather as “boy”, “George” or “Jack”. African-American women were called “Aunt” or by their first names, never “Miss” or “Mrs”. Newspapers rarely reported the names of Black people but instead described them as “negro”, as in, “a man and a women were killed, and two Negroes”. Whites did not shake hands with Blacks or socialise with them on the street. Interpretation 2: An extract from historian, Stephen Tuck, We Ain’t What We Ought To Be: The Black Freedom Struggle from Emancipation to Obama (2010) North and South, local people faced discrimination. Writing in the American Mercury in June 1949 for the “millions of complacent white folk in the big Northern cities,” the Black journalist George Schuyler listed a litany of racial injustices: jail sentences for intermarriage were longer in some northern states than in the South; more than half of northern cities had no Black clerks or store salesmen whatsoever; 95 percent of New York’s parks were for whites only. In a Washington D.C., dog cemetery, “even a white dog is barred if its owner is Black!”… White southern segregationists mobilized in defense of the status quo, and white residents of northern cities fought to preserve the de facto color line. 28 1.2 Progress in education The significance of the Brown v. Topeka case (1954). Source B: A photograph of Barnard School, in Washington, D.C., which was integrated a year after the Brown decision. Source C: From the memories of Pat Shuttlesworth Massengill, daughter of the civil rights activist Reverend Shuttlesworth. Here Pat remembers when she and her sister, Ricky, were taken to Philips Academy in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1958 to be integrated into a ‘white’ school. The car pulled up and there were mobs of people saying, “N****rs go home!” and shouting obscenities. All those vicious-looking people saying things you hadn’t heard before out loud. It didn’t make sense to me to get out of the car with all those people surrounding us. But Daddy was going to try to do it anyway. They started to attack him. Then my mother got out because he was being attacked, and that’s when she got stabbed in the hip. Interpretation 1: An extract from a book by American historian, Harvard Sitkoff, The Struggle for Black Equality, 1954-1992 (1993) "The repeated heroism of the black men, women, and children engaged in the school- desegregation battle, moreover, broke the shackles from many chained minds. [The decision in Brown...galvanized black activists to fight for their civil rights and convinced them that the federal government would support them in their struggle." Interpretation 2: An extract from an article by American historian, James T. Patterson, The Troubled Legacy of Brown v. Board (2002) One would have expected the number of civil rights demonstrations in the United States to have increased after Brown v. Board, particularly when the South [ignored] the decision as it did in the late fifties. In fact, there were fewer civil rights demonstrations in most of the late 1950s than there had been in 1943 or in 1946, 1947, and 1948.... There was no steady escalation of demonstrations during the first five or six years after the decision… The attention given to civil rights in the late 1950s by the press...was really rather modest…. Similarly, civil rights did not emerge as a key issue in the 1960 presidential campaign between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon…. Overall, the white population didn’t give much heed to civil rights. 29 The importance of events at Little Rock in 1957 Source B: An adapted extract from the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Topeka (1954). Segregation has a detrimental effect upon colored children. The impact is greater when it has the approval of the law, for the policy usually suggests the inferiority of the negro group. A sense of inferiority affects the motivation of a child to learn. Segregation, therefore, has a tendency to slow down the educational and mental development of negro children and to deprive them of some of the benefits they would receive in an integrated school system. In the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. It is inherently unequal. Source C: A photograph of segregationists protesting the integration of Little Rock High School at the Arkansas state capitol, 1959. Interpretation 1: An adapted extract from a 2011 history book, Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy, by historian Mary Dudziak In Brown v. Topeka (1954) the Supreme Court decided that school segregation was against the US Constitution. The Brown decision made it seem that the story American propaganda told was correct, that American democracy was based on principles of justice and equality. But the events in Little Rock threatened to undermine this story. As Little Rock became a massive worldwide news story, Eisenhower was forced to act. Each incident of discrimination reinforced the importance of race to US relations with predominantly black nations elsewhere in the world. Interpretation 2: An extract from a 1997 article called ‘The Little Rock Crisis: Success or Failure for the NAACP?’, by historian Adam Fairclough The Little Rock Crisis, followed by the Governor of Arkansas’ triumphant re-election, killed the NAACP’s hoped that school integration might be quick and painless. The two events revealed how great the white opposition to integration was. Southern politicians already knew that there were no votes to be won by supporting integration. They now saw there were lots of votes to be won by appealing to the worst attitudes of white voters. 30 1.3 The Montgomery Bus Boycott and its impact, 1955–60 The reasons why the Montgomery Bus Boycott was successful – choose two of the sources / interpretations Source B: From an interview with James Farmer after the end of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Farmer was a civil rights activist and founder of CORE. The Montgomery Bus Boycott had the charisma to capture the imagination of people. King had a combination of qualities: he was a Southern Baptist preacher, speaking with a Southern accent – that was important – who could preach. At the same time, he could address a Harvard audience and do it intelligently. How many preachers at that time – 1955, 1956 – knew of Gandhi and his work and could speak of non-violence? King was just perfect. Source D: From a leaflet made by Jo Ann Robinson of the Montgomery Women’s Political Council on 1 December 1955. It asks Black Americans in Montgomery, Alabama to participate in a bus boycott on 5 December. Another Negro woman has been arrested and thrown into jail because she refused to get up out of her seat on the bus for a white person to sit down. It is the second time since the Claudette Colvin case that a Negro woman has been arrested for the same thing. This has to be stopped. Negroes have rights, too, for if Negroes did not ride the buses, they could not operate. Three-fourths of the riders are Negroes, yet we are arrested, or have to stand over empty seats. If we do not do something to stop these arrests, they will continue. The next time it may be you, or your daughter, or mother. This woman’s case will come up on Monday. We are, therefore, asking every Negro to stay off the buses Monday in protest of the arrest and trial. Don’t ride the bus to work, to town, to school, or anywhere else on Monday. You can afford to stay out of school for one day if you have no other way to go except by bus. You can also afford to stay out of town for one day. If you work, take a cab, or walk. But please, children and grown-ups, don’t ride the bus at all on Monday. Please stay off the buses. Interpretation 1: An extract from historian, Adam Fairclough, To Redeem the Soul of America: The Southern Christian Leadership Conference and Martin Luther King, Jr. (1987) King led the boycott with skill and intelligence…. He became the MIA's ambassador, representing its cause throughout the nation before white and black audiences, and in doing so, he acted as the MIA's chief fundraiser. He had the education and self-assurance to cope with the press, and he developed a keen sense of public relations. Calm and articulate, he handled reporters well, presenting the boycotter's case reasonably and persuasively…. By any objective appraisal, King made a massive contribution to the success of the boycott. Interpretation 2: From ‘To Walk in Dignity: The Montgomery Bus Boycott’ in the Organisation of American Historians Magazine of History (2005) by Clayborne Carson The ultimate success of the boycott resulted not only from the perseverance of MIA members but also from the determination of the lawyers who challenged segregated bus seating in the courts. Clifford Durr worked closely with black attorney Fred Gray to provide legal defence for Parks and later advised NAACP attorneys involved in the Browder v. Gayle (1956) case that struck down the legal basis for segregation on Montgomery’s buses, achieving the boycott’s objective. 31 2.2 Peaceful protests and their impact, 1963–65 Impact of peaceful protest in the early 1960s Source B: A speech by Malcolm X discussing the March on Washington from 1963 It’s just like when you’ve got some coffee that’s too black, which means it’s too strong. What you do? You integrate it with cream; you make it weak. If you pour too much cream in, you won’t even know you ever had coffee. It used to be hot, it becomes cool. It used to be strong, it becomes weak. It used to wake you up, now it’ll put you to sleep. This is what they did with the March on Washington. They joined it. They didn’t integrate it; they infiltrated it. They joined it, became part of it, took it over. And as they took it over, it lost its militancy. They ceased to be angry. They ceased to be hot. They ceased to be uncompromising. Why, it even ceased to be a march. It became a picnic, a circus. Nothing but a circus, with clowns and all. You had one right here in Detroit – I saw it on television – with clowns leading it, white clowns and black clowns. I know you don’t like what I’m saying, but I’m going to tell you anyway. ‘cause I can prove what I’m saying. If you think I’m telling you wrong, you bring me Martin Luther King and A. Philip Randolph and James Farmer and those other three, and see if they’ll deny it over a microphone. Source C: In 1963 a group of clergymen published an open letter to Martin Luther King Jr., calling nonviolent demonstrations against segregation “unwise and untimely.” From the Birmingham jail where he was imprisoned for his participation in demonstrations, King wrote a letter in reply. This is an excerpted version of that letter. …Birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the United States. Its ugly record of brutality is widely known. Negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts. There have been more unsolved bombings of Negro homes and churches in Birmingham than in any other city in the nation. These are the hard, brutal facts of the case. On the basis of these conditions, Negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. But the latter consistently refused to engage in good-faith negotiation…. You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling, for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. Interpretation 1: From an article written for the Organisation of American Historians Magazine of History in 2005 by Erin Cook and Leanna Racine. Here, they are writing about the events that followed 3 May. The next day [ 4 May 1963] newspapers around the country carried shocking images of the violence taking place in Birmingham. Pictures of children being attacked by dogs, of fire hoses knocking bodies into the street and up against buildings, and of women being beaten by policemen helped awaken the “moral conscience of the nation.” On May 10, an agreement was announced resulting in the desegregation of many of Birmingham’s public facilities. Interpretation 2: An interview with Gary Younge who wrote The Speech: The Story Behind Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Dream (2013) Malcolm X called it [the March on Washington] the “farce on Washington.” And he was kind of mocking people, kind of somewhat gently, but saying, you know, “You’re all going to this picnic. It’s going to be a big waste of time,” talking to lots of reporters, and really kind of having quite a good time poking fun of the whole thing. 32 The achievements of the civil rights movement in the years 1960–65 Source B: A photograph published on the front page of several US newspapers in July 1964. It shows President Johnson presenting Martin Luther King with one of the pens used to sign the Civil Rights Act (1964). Source C: From a radio interview with John Lewis in 2009. Lewis was a civil rights activist who was at the demonstrations in Selma in March 1965. On Sunday 7 March, about 600 of us started walking in a peaceful fashion through the streets of Selma. As we came to a bridge the Alabama state police attacked us and released tear gas. A state trooper hit me on the head with his truncheon. I thought I was going to die. I was knocked out. I really don’t know how I made it back across that bridge. President Johnson didn’t like what was happening. Eight days after ‘Bloody Sunday’ he gave one of the most important speeches any President has ever made to Congress when he introduced the Voting Rights Act. Two weeks later we marched again. 300 people set off and by the time we reached Montgomery there were more than 25,000. That march led Congress to pass the Voting Rights Act. Interpretation 1: From The Bill of the Century: The Epic Battle for the Civil Rights Act by C Risen, published in 2014. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the most important law passed by Congress in the 20th century. The Act banned segregation in hotels and guest houses. It banned discrimination in the workplace. It stopped federal government money from being spent on state projects which were segregated. The Act had been proposed by President Kennedy in response to growing racial tension in the South, particularly the violent treatment of black protesters in Birmingham, Alabama. In Congress, support for the Act grew after events such as the March on Washington. Interpretation 2: From Better Day Coming by A Fairclough, published in 2001. Five months after the Selma protests in 1965, the Voting Rights Act became law. The Act banned the literacy tests which had been used to keep the number of registered voters low in several states in the South. The Voting Rights Act gave the vote back to black Southerners and made the South democratic. The Voting Rights Act was the greatest achievement of the Civil Rights Movement. It ended the era of Jim Crow. 33 The impact of the Black Power movement Source B: The recollections of David Dawley, a white student who joined the March Against Fear. One afternoon in Greenwood, Mississippi, I was in a crowd that was listening to speakers from a porch. Willie Ricks from SNCC was introduced and Willie Ricks was angry and he was lashing out at Whites like a cracking whip. And as he talked, there was a chill, there was a feeling of a rising storm… As Willie Ricks asked people they wanted and they answered, “Freedom now,” Willie Ricks exhorted [encouraged] the crowd to demand not freedom now, but Black Power. He kept talking at the crowd and when he asked what they wanted, they answered, “Freedom now,” but more answered “Black Power,” until eventually Black Power began to dominate, until finally everyone together was thundering, “Black Power! Black Power!” And that was chilling, that was frightening. Source C: A photograph showing Tommie Smith (centre) and John Carlos (right) giving the Black Power salute at the 1968 Mexico Olympics. Interpretation 1: From The Civil Rights Movement (2004) by historian Mark Newman. He is considering the effects of the Black Power movement. In some ways a continuation of the civil rights movement’s concerns and in others a departure from them, Black Power divided the national civil rights coalition, alienated white supporters, destroyed SNCC, decimated [ruined] CORE, produced a range of competing visions, and fanned an already advanced white reaction against black demands for the substance [actual] equality. Black Power was part of a new wave of black nationalism which boosted black pride, consciousness and identity, but enjoyed little success politically. Interpretation 2: From We Ain’t What We Ought To Be: The Black Freedom Struggle from Emancipation to Obama (2010) by historian Stephen Tuck. He is considering the effects of the Black Power movement. Most [Black Power] groups combined racial pride and political goals. Many focussed on the poor, condemned middle-class black leaders, called for reparations [compensation payments] to be paid for slavery, and identified with non-white protest abroad…. These Black Power groups had plenty of slogans, but they went far beyond posturing [doing things for effect]. Black Power was often entirely practical when applied to a particular place at a particular moment. The revolutionary trade union movement demanded more black jobs and black representatives in decision making. Black Power student groups demanded more black faculty members [teaching staff], better treatment of black staff, and courses on black history. 34 The methods of the Black Panthers Source B: From a television interview with Bobby Seale in 1988. Bobby Seale was one of the people who created the Black Panther Party. Here he is commenting on an event which happened just after the Black Panther Party had been started in 1966. During one of our armed patrols we saw the police trying to arrest someone. So we got out of our car and approached them. A crowd of 20 or 30 people were watching and they saw that we were carrying guns. We told the crowd: ‘We are a new organisation, the Black Panther Party. We’re here to observe these police in the community, and to make sure there’s not going to be any more police brutality.’ A policeman came over to us and said ‘What are you going to do with those guns?’ We said ‘Well we got them to defend ourselves and to observe you.’ Source C: From an article in The Black Panther, published in 1969. The Black Panther was the official newspaper of the Black Panther Party and was sold in cities across the USA. We created the ‘Free Breakfast for School Children’ scheme because we understand that our children need a healthy breakfast every morning to help them learn. Our people have gone hungry for too long and we say that this must stop. It is a beautiful sight to see our children eat in the mornings. Teachers in the schools say that there is a great improvement in the academic skills of the children that do get breakfast. The free breakfasts have already been started in a number of cities. But our love for the people makes us realise that we must provide free breakfasts right across the country. Interpretation 1: From Rethinking the Black Freedom Movement by Y Williams, published in 2016. The Black Panther Party for Self Defence (BPP) gained national attention. It encouraged confrontation and armed self-defence. Members of the BPP were tough men from the cities who were not afraid to fight back against racism. One of their main aims was to stop police brutality. The BPP carried out armed patrols. These armed patrols followed and observed the police. There were several confrontations with police, including a shootout in 1967 when a policeman was killed. Interpretation 2: From On the Ground: The Black Panther Party in Communities across America by J L Jeffries, published in 2010. The Black Panther Party aimed to improve black people’s lives. Many members of the movement worked to meet the basic needs of black communities across the country. They did this by helping the elderly, setting up health clinics and giving out free clothing. In cities where they had offices, the Black Panther Party ran far-reaching and wide-ranging community support programmes. At the same time, they taught children about black history and black pride. 35  Sources and Interpretations on US involvement in Vietnam Source B: From a memorandum written by the Joint Chiefs of the US military to President Kennedy in 1962. The communist aggression in Southeast Asia is part of a major campaign to extend communism control beyond the edges of the Chinese-Soviet bloc and overseas to both island and continental areas in the Free World, through a comparatively soft outlet, the Southeast Asian Peninsula. It is, in fact, a planned phase in the communist time table for world domination. Source C: From a speech given by Ho Chi Minh in 1945, declaring Vietnam’s independence at the end of the Second World War. The whole Vietnamese people, inspired by a common purpose, are determined to fight to the bitter end against any attempt by the French colonialists to reconquer their country. A people who have courageously opposed French domination for more than eighty years…such a people must be free and independent. For these reasons, we… solemnly declare to the world that Vietnam has the right to be a free and independent country—and in fact is so already. The entire Vietnamese people are determined to mobilize all their physical and mental strength, to sacrifice their lives and property in order to safeguard their independence and liberty. Interpretation 1: From ‘The Domino Theory as a case study’ (2010) by historian David Anderson. Vietnam was never a vital interest for the United States, never worth going all out for… The Vietnam War was a civil war, not a struggle for the global balance of power… The vision of falling dominoes ignores the power of nationalism and the ability of states to resist domination by a neighbour. Exactly who was it that, after it had conquered South Vietnam, was going to spread its power across Asia and the Pacific to threaten the European nations and the United States at their own borders? Inspired by Vietnamese nationalism, Hanoi had the capacity to be victorious in Vietnam and to unite the country, but it had neither the power nor the intent to expand or conquer other territories, including the US. Interpretation 2: From Triumph Forsaken (2006) by historian Mark Moyar. I believe that the Vietnamese communists had the intentions and, increasingly, the capabilities to expand beyond Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh and his followers fervently believed in communism. By the early 1960s, they already had large numbers of troops in Laos… During 1965, Hanoi and Beijing were working in unison to spread communism across Asia… Meeting in the spring of 1965, Ho Chi Minh and Mao discussed building roads to Thailand in order to fight future wars. a) Study Sources B and C. How useful are Sources B and C for an enquiry into whether US involvement in Vietnam was necessary? Explain your answer, using Sources B and C and your knowledge of the historical context. b) Study Interpretations 1 and 2. They give different views about whether US involvement in Vietnam was necessary. What is the main difference between these views? Explain your answer, using details from both interpretations. c) Suggest one reason why Interpretations 1 and 2 give different views about whether US involvement was necessary. You may use Sources B and C to help explain your answer. d) How far do you agree with Interpretation 2 about whether US involvement in Vietnam was necessary? Explain your answer using both interpretations and your knowledge of the historical context. 36 37